Forum:Suggestions
There are currently about 150 items in the Wanted list. This varies as articles are written or titles are redirected. An important piece of information to check when creating a new page is the number of links to the page, which is listed next to the item on the Wanted list. Most often links are directed to the singular form of an item and once that page is created, the plural form is redirected to the page written for the singular form. This is in part by design, it is a simple matter to create a link to the singular form and add an 's' outside the link to appear to be a link to the plural form as needed. There are exceptions to this guideline, such as the race pages, but it is probably a good idea to check the number of links when putting a title on a new page (or choosing the link to use). This is not a major issue, it's effect is only measured by the number of redirects. The point is that if there is only a few links to the plural form and a hundred links to the singular form, or vice versa, the one with the most links should be used as the title of the page and the other be redirected. Again, not a major issue...just a guideline. Also, on the page itself, any link that is the same as the title will appear as bold. Any link in the other form will continue to appear as a link, even though it is simply a redirect. In this case I have been trying to replace the link with bold to avoid having a link that simply redirects to the same page. Hopefully this makes sense, but there is a reason I didn't become a teacher (so please ask if you need more info). :p MysticX2 (talk) 11:11, May 23, 2013 (UTC) I've realized that sometimes you might have suggestions regarding certain pages but you don't really want to write a section or edit something that is already there. This could be anything related to any MOM page or suggestion for a page that doesn't exist yet. Some things that are suggested may take some time while other things that are suggested may be able to be done immediately. Please check back because there may be questions for clarity. Thanks for visiting this Wiki. MysticX2 (talk) 11:05, April 14, 2013 (UTC) Archive Links Archives are for reference and generally for viewing only, to allow preservation of discussions regarding page creation. New suggestions should be made below, even when related to an archived discussions. Archive Archive - Normal Units Archive - Race(s) Item Powers Some changes were made recently, namely Item Enchantments was changed to Item Powers. The purpose of this section is to determine if this causes any confusion and get your opinions. I'll try to summarize some of the discussion that ensued when I saw the changes. (the background discussion can be seen at User_talk:I_like_Serena). Pro = supports the change to Item Powers *** Con = supports Item Enchantment * Pro - the icons in the game files refers to the images as item powers.(viewable with a game editor) * Pro - there are differences in game play and some are pretty subtle. An obvious difference is that unit enchantments can be dispelled, but item powers cannot. * Pro - they show up as differently colored icons (dark brown instead of purple). * Con - the game manual and in-game references are all item enchantment. * Con - when using the term power (on an item) it may possibly be confused with * Con - the average player will not likely be looking in the game files and therefore would not see the references as item powers. This is conjecture, but still needs to be considered or disproved. Please state below Pro or Con and any comment you are compelled to add: MysticX2 (talk) 10:34, August 25, 2013 (UTC) : I don't really care about the name. I wouldn't have changed the name itself in the first place. However, reverting those 50 edits would be stupid. RJAK (talk) 13:29, August 26, 2013 (UTC) ::It can't be that difficult because even ILSE managed to change them. :p j/k MysticX2 (talk) 00:56, August 27, 2013 (UTC) Icon Links Honestly, I don't like those , and icons. But IMHO the biggest problem is, that you can't edit its links. will be often used as +1 sword. But It links to the Melee Attack page, which doesn't describe how Melee Damage works. Melee Attack is dedicated more to Special Attacks and the order of combat than the normal sword attack itself. will be used to describe Magical weapons. It links to Melee Attack page, which doesn't even mention magical weapons. will be often used as a symbol for all 3 types of Ranged Attacks, but it will always link to the Ranged Missile Attack page. I hope, you see my point. RJAK (talk) 13:22, August 26, 2013 (UTC) :First I moved this section to make it easier. I do see your point, and I had never noticed that about the Melee Attack page, but those are not even used on the page at all!! I'm wondering if I might have over-used the icons and if Headrock might have as well. The Icon Glossary defines the swords (all 4 icons) as A unit property indicating the potential amount of Melee Damage it can deliver in combat. Each icon represents a different "level", with various benefits. :And the ranged icons (bow and rock) as A unit property indicating the potential amount of Ranged Damage it can deliver in combat. Each icon represents a different type of attack, with various benefits and drawbacks. Again likely some misuse involved, but we may need to change something. :The links have to be to one page per icon, although I was looking at something that may indicate a way to redirect to one of two icons...I haven't figured it out completely and it may be something that can't be done with templates even, just links (no icons). Anyway, the ranged - bow icon will have to link to one page and it sounds like it was misused as well. If the page needs to link to Ranged Attack there is no icon for that and the template shouldn't be used. I'm assuming that a lot of the misuse was mine, and it should be fixed. The Melee Attack page certainly needs some additional information. Headrock tried to teach me that the icons should mainly be used when the strength of an attack was being used, but I'm afraid a lot of my edits may have abused the icons (including today's earlier edits). :To summarize, the Melee Attack page needs to be updated to include the Melee - Normal, Magic, Mithril, and Adamantium. Does Melee - Magic Sword warrant a page of its own? Secondly, the icon use needs to be reviewed and corrected - especially when the page link needs to be to something other than the normal icon link. Does that sound right and is there more? MysticX2 (talk) 14:48, August 26, 2013 (UTC) ::It isn't that bad. It just concerns the 4 swords and the bow icon. The major part (causing confusion) can be done by editing the Melee Attack page. Is there a way to add new icon templates (new template, same icon, other link) or modify existing ones (IMO Magic, Mithril, Adamantium should link to another page)? RJAK (talk) 16:17, August 26, 2013 (UTC) :::Well, I meant that they could be corrected when found, not necessarily that they should be searched out. As for one icon linking to two different pages, I haven't found a way to do that. I think we can work around that by only using the icons when they SHOULD link to the specific pages and using the regular link otherwise. If the text is just saying Ranged Attack and the link needs to be to the Ranged Attack page, the icon was probably used incorrectly and it should be changed to Ranged Attack. :::The biggest problem that I've seen is Slingers, and using the same icon as is used in the game for them. We have tried to note their exception when necessary, but we may have missed some of those. It's great when something applies to both Missile and Boulder attacks. :::I'll see if I can work something up for the Melee Attack page that illustrates the Normal, Magic, Mithril, and Adamantium...unless someone else wants to do that. MysticX2 (talk) 00:54, August 27, 2013 (UTC) : I don't want to. I am bad at formulating things. Do those look exactly the same? +1 +1 :At least, it behaves differently, when you move your mouse over the text. BTW how do you add horizontal space (spacing like 5 Space keys in a row)? RJAK (talk) 06:09, August 27, 2013 (UTC) ::Ok, I see what you are saying, and I suppose they could be used that way, but if the images are overused it dilutes their purpose. That doesn't mean they should never be used that way, just that it should be important for the image to be included with the image link changed and if that is the case it SHOULD be done. ::I was looking at this edit on the Weapon Immunity page, For example, a Recruit Barbarian Spearmen unit will sparely hit Werewolves with its Melee Damage. On the other hand, its Thrown Attack will have fairly high chances to inflict damage to the Werewolves. I'm curious why the link to Thrown when using Thrown Attack seems to serve the same purpose and have the same meaning. This edit also introduced me to a word I wasn't familiar with - sparely, and I almost changed it to barely. Should it be changed? MysticX2 (talk) 10:44, August 27, 2013 (UTC) :::I noticed, that the font had another color in my example above. In comparison: , +1. :::Just to clarify: I will use those icons in both ways, as attack type and as attack strength. I just think, the linked pages should have a proper explanation respectively those icons shouldn't link to wrong pages (e.g. that's not the case for the boxes on the right side of the pages Slingers and True Light). :::Half of the times I don't know, why I do things the way I do. Thrown Attack should be replaced with Thrown attack (not sure if it's Attack or attack). I think I got now the meaning of the Thrown Attack page. It should explain the damage done by Thrown. So those 2 pages stand in the same relation like these pairs: Melee Attack & Melee Damage, Stoning Gaze & Stoning Damage (although there are 2 different kinds of Stoning Damage), Fire Breath & Fire Damage. Sometimes it is a bit confusing, because Thrown Attack and Melee Attack use both the word Attack, but stand on different sites of those relations (both are linked by & ). :::Dictionary doesn't know the word sparely, so I probably meant barely. RJAK (talk) 14:04, August 27, 2013 (UTC) ::This is what I found when I checked: Adv. 1. sparely - in a spare manner; "William held me longest with his recent bronzes sparely arranged at Waddington's galleries". Anyway, I edited the section but I think I overused an icon again by adding the damage icon. MysticX2 (talk) 09:06, August 28, 2013 (UTC) :I think I got now how to simulate icons: +1 +1 +1 +1 : It looks identically. The only difference is, that you don't get a popup description when you move your mouse over the text (+1). Code is a bit long. I have no knowledgs of HTML, so no clue if you can do it shorter. MysticX, is it ok, when I replace some of the bow and rock icons in the Wiki? RJAK (talk) 16:36, August 29, 2013 (UTC) Race pages At some point much of what I wrote for the pages can or should probably be replaced. Below are some pages that may have unfinished sections, or sections that could use more information. citizens section Halflings, High Elves, High Men, Klackons, Lizardmen, Orcs, Beastmen, Dark Elves, Draconians, Trolls Interracial Relations section Klackons, Lizardmen, Orcs, Beastmen, Dark Elves, Draconians Complimentary Magic section Lizardmen, Nomads, Orcs, Beastmen, Dark Elves, Draconians, Dwarves Unrest I've been using Headrock's chart from the Fortress page for the unrest tables, but we have another chart that is different on the Races page (which needs a lot of rewriting). The thing about the one on the Races page is that it is copyrighted and there is no indication from the person that posted it of permission to use the chart. There are some differences, and the one Headrock posted has the statement that changes might be needed. Thoughts or suggestions? MysticX2 (talk) 11:51, May 12, 2013 (UTC) I seem to have lost my connection for a few minutes! The statement on his page is that it is "possibly copyrighted by someone named..." For now I'll leave it for that reason, but I'll check into it further. MysticX2 (talk) 12:18, May 12, 2013 (UTC) As there were some questions recently (especially ones regarding Great Wasting and Armageddon), I think the lack of data on additional unrest modifiers should be mentioned here. Perhaps some kind of full unrest chart mentioning all the modifiers? Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 09:47, June 13, 2013 (UTC) Introduction Page I think I have figured out a rough outline of some things to include on an introduction page which will also take care of a few of the links I had no idea of what to do with them. The page might be better entitled information page, but basically it would include information about Microprose, Simtex, Releases, and Patches. Originally I was thinking of having a separate page for Releases and Patches, but I was also thinking that the information would include changes from previous releases or patches. Now I'm leaning more toward something along the lines of, "continuing projects" with a link to the site with the best information about those projects/patches and only stating that they exist and for the most current information follow the link. This will allow for the page to be written and offer access to the newest information without having to write a new section every time a patch is changed. Thoughts or suggestions, volunteers to work on such a page? MysticX2 (talk) 13:53, June 3, 2013 (UTC) :Well, there are plenty of "patches", remakes of MoM and it's spiritual successors, we could mention all of them, but their quality differs greatly. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 16:28, June 3, 2013 (UTC) ::I'd like to avoid any works in progress patches or spiritual successors. I'm not too sure I like spiritual successors because those are often so subjective. For the moment I think there are enough completed patches, even when the work continues, and remakes. Ideally I'd like to make sure that new things work well and links aren't virus havens before including their links on a page. I know kyrub's work, and I'm fairly comfortable with including the link for v 1.40, but that is the only one I have any information about really. ::My concern is that including a link on a wiki page automatically lends credibility to another site and the patch, remake, etc. I don't have a problem with one being mentioned by a contributor in the Talk sections, but in the page itself should be thoroughly checked out. Also, I hate to follow a link only to find that you have to have an account on that site to access any information (for similar reasons). MysticX2 (talk) 11:22, June 5, 2013 (UTC) :::Agree. Should we start finding and posting links so we can check if they're worthy to mention? Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 01:56, June 6, 2013 (UTC) ::::Dozens, which is to say scores, and probably even hundreds, of core game concepts either need pages or need to have their existing content fleshed out. Consider how Normal Unit and Mana are each redlinked nearly 400 times. Though anything can be contributed of course... Spearman D92-R (talk) 02:44, June 6, 2013 (UTC) ::Yeah, I think we can start collecting links. It will take some time to confirm their play-ability...and to ensure that they are not "traps". I should also mention that I have not played any of kyrub's patches for MOM, I played his patch for Master of Orion and that is how I know about kyrub's work. MysticX2 (talk) 10:11, June 6, 2013 (UTC) :::Okay. For now, I can say that Implode's MP Edition is rather unworthy. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 14:58, June 6, 2013 (UTC) For the moment the Introduction page is a work in progress. I have it outlined and a good bit written, but I want to improve some of it so it may take a few days for me to post the rest of it. For now, please don't make any edits to the page except as requested. If you have suggestions for the page you may post them here. Thanks. MysticX2 (talk) 14:12, August 20, 2013 (UTC) : You should mention that MoM needs expanded memory (EMS) - some kind of memory type missing on nowadays computers. So you have to play/emulate it with DosBox. Perhaps mention where to buy MoM, too. RJAK (talk) 18:21, August 20, 2013 (UTC) ::Yeah, you're right. I was trying to write around it, but if this is going to be the best reference for the game it needs to have info like that. There's a reason that you can edit sections. Do you have links for where to get the game? MysticX2 (talk) 09:43, August 21, 2013 (UTC) GOG :: You can buy it at GOG.com for 6 dollars. http://www.gog.com/game/master_of_magic :: You can also download it for free on some pages, but this should be illegal. RJAK (talk) 11:05, August 21, 2013 (UTC) ::: I kind of doubt whether GOG is really completely legal. The copyright of MoM seems to be sort of lost between company bankrupties and takeovers. As long as there is not too much at stake, I think it's just that no one takes any action.I like Serena (talk) 18:34, August 21, 2013 (UTC) From what I can find Atari seems to be the current owner of the copyright, is there more recent information? I also wondered how GOG works as far as gaining rights to sell games, but I think I've seen MOM for sell on abandonia.com and it links to GOG for that game. MysticX2 (talk) 19:38, August 22, 2013 (UTC) Operating Systems I'm struggling to find the information and to write the system requirements. I play the game on an XP, but that was several systems ago and I really don't know what to mention. Does anyone here have some expertise in using newer operating systems for playing the game? What information should be included? Any good support links? MysticX2 (talk) 00:33, August 28, 2013 (UTC) I'm likely over-thinking it, so a few suggestions will help. MysticX2 (talk) 09:21, August 28, 2013 (UTC) : I expect it to simply work on all platforms. What you need is a working DOSBox, which runs on all Windows versions, all Linux distributions, and all Mac versions, as you can see here: http://www.dosbox.com/download.php?main=1 : DOSBox itself has been supporting Master of Magic since its earliest versions, as you can see here: http://www.dosbox.com/comp_list.php?showID=40&letter=M : I like Serena (talk) 16:53, August 28, 2013 (UTC) Crafting This section will be for discussing and suggestions for crafting, instead of using the talk for the create artifact and enchant item pages. MysticX2 (talk) 09:26, April 22, 2013 (UTC) Just noting some related pages that may be affected by crafting. Item Enchantments, Magical Item, Item Merchants, Item. I think the entire reason I found this wiki was because I was looking for a default list of magical items, so I have begun to create a sortable and numbered list of magical items with that in mind. Any suggestions that should be specifically mentioned on the magical item page will be appreciated. MysticX2 (talk) 10:31, May 23, 2013 (UTC) :I've changed my mind about the main content of the Magical Item page. Originally I thought that the item list would be the main content, now I'm thinking that the list will be a separate page. Since I'm very slow at writing content, this will take longer than I had hoped. MysticX2 (talk) 09:47, June 1, 2013 (UTC) ::I think Magical Item should only have very basic information and mostly links to different types of items. As for list, should be a page for Pre-defined Magical Items. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 15:08, June 1, 2013 (UTC) Spell Saves Does anyone know exactly the list of spells affected by -N spell saves when cast by it's holder? Should we create such a list somewhere? Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 16:44, July 20, 2013 (UTC) :I believe that would be any spell that allows a Resistance roll. MysticX2 (talk) 20:12, July 20, 2013 (UTC) ::Well, we cleared this one in chat discussion, but not here. It is not any spell that involves a Resistance check or roll. For example, Death Spell is not affected by -N Spell Saves.Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 04:40, July 27, 2013 (UTC) :It seems that there were only a few that weren't affected, but what were those few? MysticX2 (talk) 09:47, August 26, 2013 (UTC) :Does that mean when an item has an enchantment with minus resistance, example Stoning -1, Holy Avenger -4, or Death -3, the spell save bonuses on the equipment do not affect the resistance for those attacks? In other words, if the weapon (or other equipment) had Death AND -4 spell save, the Death Damage would still be based on the normal -3 resistance? Do Spell Saves do anything for Vampiric, , or do Spell Saves only affect spells cast by the Hero? MysticX2 (talk) 09:16, August 30, 2013 (UTC) ::Exactly, if they on RB are right: Spell Saves only affect cast spells, 'cept Death Spell and Holy Word. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 15:53, August 30, 2013 (UTC) :::I like to use abbreviations as often as possible, but I'm drawing a blank on what "RB" is? MysticX2 (talk) 22:15, August 31, 2013 (UTC) ::::RB is Realms Beyond (see elsewhere on this same page). I like Serena (talk) 10:25, September 1, 2013 (UTC) The complete list of spells on which -N spell save has effect is (from the code): :#Banish :#Black Sleep :#Confusion :#Creature Binding :#Disintegrate :#Dispel Evil :#Petrify :#Possession :#Shatter :#Vertigo :#Weakness :#Word of Death These are all the destroy unit spells and all the resistable combat enchantments. Note that direct damage spells, and in particular Life Drain, are NOT on the list. I guess this list should go to an unwritten page about artifacts. I like Serena (talk) 10:25, September 1, 2013 (UTC) Types of Damage I'm placing this here because I know there are some pages that need the information. So far the ones I've looked at actually have a pretty good explanation, but this needs to be worked into certain pages: :Game records 3 types of damage: A) irreversible (stoning, doom bolt, death, destruction), B) life_draining (Life Drain, Create Undead dmg, Vampiric) and C) normal damage, e.g. all other. When A >= B and A >= C, the unit cannot be recovered in any way. When B>A and B >= C, the unit turns undead. When C > A and C > B, the unit dies "normally" and can be raised from the dead, animated, regenerated or, in case of a hero, resurrected. ~Kyrub MysticX2 (talk) 01:03, July 27, 2013 (UTC) I have just actually got why exactly Undead Creation is so inconsistent and "unreliable". It was so obvious and explains any issues I had, wonder why could not think of that earlier. The thing is, that as Kyrub said, the game records the damage dealt of each type, but not damage actually taken! In other words, the amount of damage dealt (which is recorded as damage of one of these three types) can exceed the amount of hits target unit has! Example: there is an enemy unit which has 10 hit points in total. Your Ghouls attack this unit, and deal 9 hits of life_draining damage, so that unit now has 1 hit. Then your hero, who does 15 hits of normal damage on average, finishes the unit off. So you think: "Ghouls dealt 9 hits, and hero only did 1, so I should get the unit as an undead". But you won't get that unit as an undead, because hero actually did 15 hits of normal damage, and Ghouls only did 9. This is also why experiment I suggested earlier is useless, as Cracks Call and Disintegration deal the amount of damage equal to or bigger than target's max hits, so you won't get a chance to deal more. But it's possible with stoning, death, disintegrating and doom bolt, to avoid unit being lost forever. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 08:35, July 28, 2013 (UTC) Problems If you find anything that is not right on our wiki, post a note about it here, in that section. Personally, I did just found a plenty of old pages which include some wrong statements or just don't note important aspects of their subject. There can be more, so, if you feel like it, check any old page you come across. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 15:09, May 9, 2013 (UTC) :These are Non-Corporeal, where it is said that you should move NC unit out of stack before travelling via Enchanted Road (this advice is complete nonsence), Cracks Call, where it is said that this spell targets unit (while it targets a combat tile in fact), and it is not noted that Cracks Call destroys walls, Crusade, where a few things are not noted (see comments on Crusade page), Web, where it is not noted that dispelling the target allows it to fly again (you can even dispel it after web has been destroyed). By the way, we also don't have any note on Sailing movement type - only Swimming, which is used instead of Sailing (Swimming/Walking is used on Wiki when actual Swimming movement type is meant). Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 12:51, May 10, 2013 (UTC) ::It's never explicitly mentioned that Forester + Mountaineer = Pathfinding — any pages making mention of these abilities should be updated. Spearman D92-R (talk) 13:56, May 10, 2013 (UTC) :::Actually it is mentioned on the Forester page and on the Mountaineer page, I think I made that update after it was pointed out in a talk message. I don't know that it needs to be mentioned on either the Pathfinding page or the Path Finding page because that is discussing the ability and the enchantment...but there may be a section where it should be added. MysticX2 (talk) 00:46, May 11, 2013 (UTC) :::Ok, Pathfinding does have a group movement section, so it should probably be added there. MysticX2 (talk) 00:53, May 11, 2013 (UTC) It's really nice to see my advice has been taken into account, as many old pages are getting edits and discussions, but what about pages I mentioned? I don't think I can write it good enough. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 02:17, May 19, 2013 (UTC) : One thing to bear in mind is that the guy who founded and wrote most of the content on this wiki said he preferred existing pages to be as complete as possible before new ones were created. For my part, I'd like to try to follow his guidelines even in his absence so that if/when he does return (I'm guessing he will— people just need breaks), he doesn't get the impression that things have deteriorated. I know that MysticX has spent literally months just fine-tuning the existing pages prior to putting up the race page drafts, and I think he was mainly going ahead with them because a format was already submitted by Headrock with Barbarians and Gnolls. I'll definitely help you with roads because you're intent on it, but please don't get too impatient with us fuddy-duddies just yet. Spearman D92-R (talk) 15:11, May 19, 2013 (UTC) ::No, roads can wait, of course. I'm talking about mistakes, incorrect statements on NC, Cracks Call and/or Enchant Roads pages, and lack of important information on Crusade, Cracks Call and Web pages. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 16:12, May 19, 2013 (UTC) :::Yeah, I think that was mostly information that Twilight had shared with me in chat or that I indicated I would look into it...and I haven't made any significant edits since I finished posting the info I had for the race pages. I saw this earlier today, but didn't read it...so my fault, sorry. MysticX2 (talk) 00:58, May 20, 2013 (UTC) ::::Fixed most of things I mentioned, but NC page and Sailing type are still too much for me. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 14:35, May 23, 2013 (UTC) Realms Beyond I've started a thread at Realms Beyond forums, and got some interesting answers. Here's the link: http://realmsbeyond.net/forums/showthread.php?tid=6267 They suggested to continue the discussions at separate threads, but I don't know whether it should be held here, on the wiki, or at RB forums. What do you think? In any case, for those from RB who interested it'll be good to register here. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 05:52, August 6, 2013 (UTC) :You should make sure that when you are discussing what is and isn't written here you get the discussion right. You were discussing movement as if the movement pages were written on the wiki when the only movement pages that are written are the UNIT ABILITY pages. The movement types are not yet written, that includes the Walking, Swimming, Sailing, Flying, etc., and you still seem to be discussing those as if they were the same as the templates that we use! Those templates are the same things the game uses to represent the same thing they represent here. MysticX2 (talk) 10:47, August 6, 2013 (UTC) ::Sorry for that, I thought I made it clear about the swimming and sailing. I just find Swimming/Walking thing very, very wrong. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 12:42, August 6, 2013 (UTC) :::Just remember that those images represent the terrain a unit moves on, and the linked (unwritten link pages) are representative of the most common movement type on that terrain. Moves is the NUMBER of steps a unit can take, not its movement type. MysticX2 (talk) 12:58, August 6, 2013 (UTC) Finding pages While the wiki for the most part is well organized, there have been a few instances when finding a page could have been easier and could have prevented problems. For example, the first time I looked for an unrest table, I first thought there wasn't one and then I stumbled onto it on the fortress page. Another example, the chart suggestion above...I was surprised that it wasn't on the wiki only to stumble onto it a week later on the Spell Rarity page. Thoughts or suggestions? MysticX2 (talk) 11:51, May 12, 2013 (UTC) Information needs to be linked better in a ton of cases, and it has to be done intuitively by people actively searching for information. I think my first edit here was to submit a road construction chart to the engineers page, only to find that the information was located elsewhere, on the construction page. Now that I think on it, that was a HUGE shortcoming. The engineers page had 1 link to Construction, but there was no indication in the context of that link (which was just in the infobox) that it contained all the wiki's current information relevant to road building. Just for example. Spearman D92-R (talk) 22:38, May 12, 2013 (UTC) Redirects I'm putting this here because sometimes a logical link is not included on the wanted list. For example, Twilight noted that Engineer was not redirected to Engineers. I did not find Engineer in the wanted list because there were no "red" links to Engineer and therefore was not listed. Still, it is a logical link and should be redirected. Anyway, that is what this little section is for, links that should be redirected to a written page. At the moment, please only mention links to written pages that should be redirected to them (even if they are not on the wanted list). MysticX2 (talk) 11:41, May 31, 2013 (UTC) :Just noting Barrycaster's finding on Race not being redirected to Races, since our Race Pages discuss is archived. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 03:48, June 9, 2013 (UTC) :This has been done. MysticX2 (talk) 08:27, July 24, 2013 (UTC) Undead Creation So now that we know how that is handled exactly, how will we put it on the pages? Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 18:46, July 23, 2013 (UTC) :Each page will likely be a little different, although a link to the pages that need to be updated would be good to have here. MysticX2 (talk) 08:27, July 24, 2013 (UTC) ::Life Drain, Life Steal, Life Stealing Damage, Ghouls, Create Undead, Ravashack the Necromancer, Demon Lord, Wraiths, Death Knights, Sword, Axe, Mace, not existing yet Crafting. ::Also, if reading Kyrub's explanation, then it would be like if you deal most (for example, 90%) of damage to unit with normal damage, and only after that finish the unit off with irreversible, then you should be able to resurrect that unit somehow. Is that true? Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 10:32, July 24, 2013 (UTC) :::A good way to test this would be to make your hero wear some kind of item, make him injured to last hp's in the battle, finish him off with your own Cracks Call spell, then win the battle to see whether you get to redistribute the items or not. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 17:33, July 25, 2013 (UTC)